wpu.nu

Sida:Pol-2020-05-14 DA21183-04-M Camarate-air-crash.pdf/138

Från wpu.nu

Den här sidan har inte korrekturlästs


Despite these doubts raised by Fernando Fonseca, the prosecutor, after analyzing the facts and testimony, affirms that there is no basis for excluding the accidental death thesis, as the demonstrate the following points taken from the PGR report:

- « The percentages of carbon monoxide found in Eng. José Moreira and

companion, are not liable to alter the medico-legal conclusions brought to the autoptic reports, not being a basis for concluding from them

accidental death or not ». - «Neither Dr. Fernando da Fonseca declared that the death could have been caused by

introduction of a gas under pressure in the nose and mouth, as if it were a mask for

anesthesia, nor this hypothesis (...) has the least basis in objective data ». - «And what is clear is that neither the witness mentioned this, nor are there elemenis, even,

to indicate that the death was caused by the introduction of a gas under pressure in the nose and mouth (note of the rapporteur: this excerpt appears in the PGR report, analyzing the statements by the Thanatologist, Fernando Fonseca, to the III CEIAC, in 1986. In these statements, Femando Fonseca states the following: “If there were ruptures, there would be the same something that exists, for example, in the drowned, that is, small hemorrhages exactly by bursting of the pulmonary alveoli. (...) I must say that this pressure would provoke the bursting of the alveoli and, if the victims were alive, it caused hemorrhage. In In short, the PGR report mentions part of Fernando Fonseca's responses to CEIAC, but it does not evidence what was said about the rupture of the pulmonary alveoli] ».

In parallel, in the PGR report, two contradictory facts are slaled, namely the access and lack of access to the results of the histological examination by the thanatologist - the statements in which Fernando Fonseca says he does not remember having seen the results, and simultaneously the following deduction is made:

« It is certain that the reports of the histological exams must have been passed by the expert thanatologist, as was practical and in such a way that he had the opportunity to check them.

The PGR disciplinary inquiry further confinned, once again, that the results of the examinations histological samples had been delivered, by hand, to agent Herculano.

The PGR report was discussed with Deputy Attorney General Dias Bravo and with Attorney General Republic, José Narciso Cunha Rodrigues and did not result in the determination of any liability disciplinary action by the PJ and Legal Medicine Institute involved. Also note that the following elements of the PJ were heard by the prosecutors: Paulo Bernardino, Lourenço Martins, Marques Monteiro, Herculano Morgado, Mário Jorge Mendes and Artur Mendes Pinto, this last of

Costa,

superior of Herculano Morgado in the 2nd section of homicides of the PJ, was not heard.

117

118

3.5. Other questions